A dim bulb in California

arbilad · Head Chef

A dim bulb in California

salesortonscom · Wise and Revered Master

arbilad wrote:
This article talks about how a legislator in California wants to make incandescent bulbs illegal. I think that's an incredibly stupid idea. Sure, perhaps compact flourescent bulbs are better. But it is not the place of the legislature to dictate what products you can or cannot use.

But they will dictate. This is the same legislature that made it illegal to tie your dog up in the yard and is currently looking at sending parents to jail for spanking their children. The legislature in the state assembly and senate districts are so gerrymandered they know this stuff will fly and they won't have to answer for it.

Cat Herder · Understander of unimportant things

Yeah, I saw a headline about it, but deigned not to read it... Afterall, this is the same state that just made it illegal to use dry cleaning chemicals for dry cleaning...

It seems all that needs to be done in California is for someone to say "It's hurtin' the environment, Dude!" and suddenly it is the worst thing in the world and must be removed.

I read an article several days ago about how environmentalists are now starting a legal campaign to get parts of Yosemite National Park closed down because "it is ruining the environment and fragile ecosystem to be having people go there". Apparently a judge agreed wtih the complaint and put a moratorium on a development project that was going in the park, for which the National Park Service and the contracted developers had sunk hundreds of millions of dollars into, to rebuild and improve facilities that had been damaged by flooding of the Mercer River or something... This just goes to show how out of touch so many of the "Environmentalist" Green's are with things... The Park Service is going to appeal the ruling, because The Park Service has it in it's best interest to protect the physical beauty and assets of the national parks, and this ruling essentially opens the way for the environmentalist lobby to further complicate and make it impossible for the public to have access to the national parks and enjoy the things the lobbiests "claim" they are wanting to protect so people can enjoy them...

Just gotta wonder... how much is the guy with the light bulb bill being paid by the incandescent bulb makers?

salesortonscom · Wise and Revered Master

Most of those lawsuits like the Yosemite National Park one are all about the money. They sue, someone ponies up, and they lawsuit goes away. Of course the goal of the extreme environmentalists is to close wilderness areas to the public and only allow in a select few (their members).

We have a large hog operation nearby. They supply pork to Hormel via the Farmer John Brand. They are being sued by an organization on behalf of a couple San Frangayo area residents who suffered emotional harm because of the conditions the pigs had to live through before they ate them (no joke). They want the pigs to have large areas where they can mingle with the other pigs which the hog farmer pointed out is dangerous to the less dominate hogs, their piglets, and unborn piglets because the dominate sows will beat them up. The folks that are sueing are citing laws used to regulate pets and applying them to livestock. The lawsuit is a bunch of bunk but they are suing all the big pockets in this case and will probably get a big settlement. I don't know about you but when I'm eating my sausage or bacon, I'm really concerned about how that pig got to walk around and talk to the other pigs.

arbilad · Head Chef

I thought that people who cared that much about pigs usually didn't eat them. But then again, as you say, the lawsuit is about money, and not about feelings.